Audit overview
4 categories need attention: Performance, and 3 others.
Fix Priority Matrix
5 findingsQuick Wins
4High impact, low effort — start here.
Strategic
1High impact, requires investment.
Easy Improvements
0Small gains, minimal effort.
Nothing in this quadrant — good news.
Deprioritize
0Low impact, high effort — do last.
Nothing in this quadrant — good news.
Screenshots
Top Priorities (5)
Page weighs 24.1 MB (14.1 MB transferred)
Informational: total page weight (uncompressed) and bytes actually transferred over the wire.
6 control(s) without accessible label
Form controls without labels — assistive tech announces 'edit text' with no context; users can't complete forms.
9 image-only link(s) without alt text
Image-only links with no alt are unidentifiable to screen-reader users — link's destination is invisible.
9 link(s) with no accessible text
Links with no accessible text (empty <a></a>, image-only no alt, icon-only no aria-label) are unidentifiable to screen readers.
No <main> landmark found
Without a <main> landmark, screen-reader users can't skip past the navigation to the page content — every page starts with re-reading the menu.
Business case
What fixing the audit's findings is worth -- and what ignoring them keeps costing.
Return on investment
€184 investment → €8,398/month returns + EUR 120,500,000 risk avoided
Figures combine localized regulatory fine ceilings, search/conversion value priced against local CPC, and bandwidth waste estimates. Results depend on implementation quality and audience composition. Not legal or financial advice.
Conversion barriers
10 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~32%.
- Page feels frozen for 3.8sClicks on the primary CTA are ignored while JavaScript runs→ Break up long tasks; defer non-critical JavaScript to post-hydration
- Severe layout shift during page loadUsers mis-click when content jumps — converting intent into frustration→ Reserve space for images, ads, and embeds with explicit width/height
- 6 form field(s) without a labelScreen readers skip unlabeled fields; autofill can't identify them; checkout abandonment spikes→ Associate every input with a visible <label for="…">; add autocomplete attributes
- Page loads in 3.4sEvery additional 100ms above 2.5s costs conversions — you're 936ms over→ Target <2.5s LCP: defer non-critical scripts and optimize the hero image
- No HSTS headerReturning visitors are briefly exposed to downgrade attacks on first request→ Set Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains
Preliminary CRO audit — each barrier links to the tab with detailed analysis.
Remediation cost
Start here for the best return on investment
Cost by category
Cost by effort level
Adjust assumptions
Team composition
Multiplier applied to dev hours to reflect QA, design, and PM overhead. Use Dev only for solo work; Full team for projects with formal review processes.
Rates reflect fully-loaded developer cost including overhead
Warning:Cost of inaction
Compliance Risk
€120.500.000
- No privacy policy link detectedGDPR: EUR 10.000 – EUR 20.000.000
- 1 advertising/retargeting trackers detectedGDPR: EUR 10.000 – EUR 20.000.000
- Trackers detected but no cookie policy foundGDPR: EUR 5.000 – EUR 10.000.000
Bounce-Rate Cost
€6.953 /mo
+31.6pp bounce · ~3,161 lost visitors/mo
CPC: EUR 2.20
Bandwidth Waste
€3,29 /mo
44410.9 MB/mo × 0.074 EUR/GB
- Optimize transfer: save ~4.4 MB per page loadSaves €3,29/mo
Compliance figures represent the statutory maximum fine for the most severe triggered category, capped per regulation — not the sum of per-finding penalties. Based on published regulatory fine ranges. This is not legal advice.
Unique monthly visitors from your analytics
Purchases, signups, or key actions
Optional — for revenue estimation
more engaged visitors from reduced bounce
Fix 5 critical issues to capture this value
How this is calculated
Based on Google/Deloitte research ("Milliseconds Make Millions") showing a ~7% bounce rate increase per additional second of LCP above the 2.5s "Good" threshold.
Your site's LCP: → estimated after fixes.
These are estimates based on industry research — actual results vary
Your data stays in your browser — nothing is sent to our servers
Lighthouse
Mobile
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
3.44 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
3.44 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
3.85 s
Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.
0.459
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
5.26 s
Time to Interactive Time to Interactive — how long until the page is fully interactive and responds to user input. Under 3.8s is good.
16.22 s
Desktop
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
1.40 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
3.54 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
292 ms
Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.
0.045
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
1.96 s
Time to Interactive Time to Interactive — how long until the page is fully interactive and responds to user input. Under 3.8s is good.
3.56 s
Categories
8Performance
Page weighs 24.1 MB (14.1 MB transferred)
Security
All checks pass
Accessibility
6 control(s) without accessible label
SEO
All checks pass
Infrastructure
All checks pass
Compliance
All checks pass
Content
All checks pass
Sustainability
All checks pass
How you compare
Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.
Top 10% of Amazon Route 53 sites score 85+ on Performance; you're at 66 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Technology stack
Webflow 1.6.0, with Cloudflare CDN
Stack Architecture
Google Tag Manager 
Sharethrough 
Webflow 1.6.0
Cloudflare Turnstile 
Font Awesome Google Search Console Google Workspace HSTS 
HTTP/3 Microsoft 
Onsen UI 
Open Graph 
Tailwind CSS 
Webpack 
jQuery 3.5.1
reCAPTCHA Cloudflare All Detected Technologies (18)
Cloudflare is a web-infrastructure and website-security company, providing content-delivery-network services, DDoS mitigation, Internet security, and distributed domain-name-server services.
Webflow is Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) for website building and hosting.
Turnstile is Cloudflare's smart CAPTCHA alternative.
Font Awesome is a font and icon toolkit based on CSS and Less.
HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) informs browsers that the site should only be accessed using HTTPS.
HTTP/3 is the third major version of the Hypertext Transfer Protocol used to exchange information on the World Wide Web.
Onsen UI is an open-source HTML5 hybrid app framework offering mobile UI components for PhoneGap and Cordova development.
Open Graph is a protocol that is used to integrate any web page into the social graph.
Webpack is an open-source JavaScript module bundler.
jQuery is a JavaScript library which is a free, open-source software designed to simplify HTML DOM tree traversal and manipulation, as well as event handling, CSS animation, and Ajax.
reCAPTCHA is a free service from Google that helps protect websites from spam and abuse.
Google Tag Manager is a tag management system (TMS) that allows you to quickly and easily update measurement codes and related code fragments collectively known as tags on your website or mobile app.
Sharethrough is a software company that powers in-feed advertising for brands and publishers.
Observations (2)
No build tool detected
A framework (Amazon Route 53) was detected but no bundler was identified. The build tool may not be detectable from output patterns, or the site may use the framework's built-in bundler.
Complex technology stack detected
18 technologies identified. A complex stack increases maintenance burden and attack surface. Consider whether all components are actively needed.
Show your score
Drop this badge on your README, marketing site, or status page. It auto-updates every time the audit re-runs and links back to this report.
This badge auto-updates with your latest scan result.
[](https://beavercheck.com/results/91081bd9-8561-4c37-a544-e08475551a27)<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/91081bd9-8561-4c37-a544-e08475551a27"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsharethrough.com" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsharethrough.comExport & share
Download the audit, share with your team, or grab a fix plan ready to copy into your tracker.
Copies markdown to clipboard
Fix Plan
Three-week roadmap to ship the audit's findings, with one-click copy targets for your tracker.
Three-week fix plan
2 sprints · 2h total → projected C (79)
Sprint 1: Quick Wins
+6Highest ROI — low effort, high impact
- · Page weighs 24.1 MB (14.1 MB transferred)
- · No <main> landmark found
- · 9 image-only link(s) without alt text
- · 9 link(s) with no accessible text
Sprint 2: Core Fixes
+1Medium effort, high structural impact
- · 6 control(s) without accessible label